No, Mr Cameron, you can't solve porn with a hackathon


#1

[Permalink]


#2

What a breathtaking dunce you are, Mr Cameron. It would be funny if it wasn’t so dangerous. Please use the money you will waste on this going after the people distributing the child porn and leave the rest of us alone to watch the foo-foos, breast, bums and willies of grown ups having fun.


#3

Am I as an educated software developer literally being chastised by the leader of a first world government that I’m not volunteering my time to give him more power?


#4

You silly hackers. If you only had more motivation and responsibility, you would help me censor the Internet and crush electronic freedoms. But instead you are all just smoking doobies and eating Cheetos because that is all that I could fathom that you would do. Slackers!


#5

foo-foos?


#6

Can anyone educate me on what the “real issues” here are? Since this seems to cover all porn the only issue I see here is the rolled up issue of Prude Monthly up a bunch of MPs’ butts?

Edit: I see now that it seems to be talking about children seeing porn? But lots of general statements like “solve porn” or “end smut” seem much more generic? Especially considering how afraid the Cameron administration seems to be of human sexuality. Like, they seem to think it’s totally gross.


#7

I do agree with the idea of blocking porn so kids aren’t exposed to it. Sadly, I do highly doubt when this is the real reason behind that block, I do believe the mechanism put in place for the blocking of porn, would be used to block other non-governmental agreeable content, i.e. contents that in their own opinion would be a risk for national ‘security’ or w.e. In other words, I do believe in blocking porn, not using hackthon and I don’t trust him to not use it for other reasons.
P.S: The blocking can be circumvented easily but not for the kids! So if you are an adult you shouldn’t worry much!


#8

(unfortunately, I can’t access the Guardian from where I am)

Am I wrong in thinking that the “ban” is not a “ban”? My understanding was that the legislation called for ISP parental filters to default to “on”, rather than “off”.

If that’s the case, why would there seem to be any issue at all with allowing “hackers” to view porn?

Also, why do we have to “death panel” every damned thing we don’t like these days? Maybe the law sucks, but calling it a “ban” will only convince the uninformed and unreflective and stifles the important work of explaining why the actual proposal is problematic.

To tell the truth, I’m not exactly keen on the law, but I don’t see any particular principle that should cause me to reject it for anything but “bad vibes”. Too bad I don’t read some EFF-y blogs that would inform me about this sort of thing.


closed #10

This topic was automatically closed after 5 days. New replies are no longer allowed.